The week at Retraction Watch featured a lot of movement on our leaderboard, with a new total for Diederik Stapel, and a new entry. It also featured a lot going on elsewhere, so here’s part I of Weekend Reads (we’ll have more tomorrow morning):

“Phills says that Gruenfeld confessed to him that she fudged research on the paper that launched her career, and charges that, in the two years since learning about it, Stanford has looked the other way.” A business school sex scandal has many dimensions (Vanity Fair).

“It thus becomes evidence that these papers by Prof. Cope were not published at the time claimed, and I protest against the dates they bear being accepted as authentic.” A publishing complaint from 1872.

“‘This is officially becoming a trend,’ Alison McCook wrote on the blog Retraction Watch, referring to the increasing number of retractions due to fabricated peer reviews.” The New England Journal of Medicine picks up the fake peer review story.